Re: 2.6.23 alpha unistd.h changes

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>]

On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 10:47:31AM +0200, Oliver Falk wrote:
> On 09/17/2007 11:41 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 10:33:07PM +0200, Oliver Falk wrote:
> >> Hi!
> > 
> > Hi Oliver!
> > 
> >> ...
> >> As these additions are quite new to upstream kernel, but at Alphacore we
> >> have patched it since a while now (I don't know about other Alpha ports;
> >> Debian folks may speak up now!), I would suggest to use the same
> >> 'ordering' of the syscalls upstream and add the new syscalls that we had
> >> not in place, but are now upstream to the end of our 'old' list.
> >> ...
> > 
> > I just checked:
> > 
> > It seems Debian didn't patch them into the kernel at all, and since two 
> > months Debian unstable ships kernel 2.6.22 with the upstream syscall 
> > numbers.
> 
> That's possible a problem. Right. Someone with contacts to Debian here?
> If Debian hasn't rebuilt glibc against the new headers, we could change
> it without problems.
>...

According to the Debian auto-builder database [1], the Alpha glibc 
package in Debian unstable has been rebuilt 8 times since the 2.6.22 
kernel packages entered Debian unstable.

And it's not only Debian, at least Gentoo also offers an Alpha port.

> Best,
>  Oliver

cu
Adrian

[1] http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=alpha&pkg=glibc

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed